Re: [PATCH v1 2/6] ArmVirtPkg: Add Platform CI and configuration for Core CI

["Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>]

On 04/09/20 11:23, Leif Lindholm wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2020 at 11:17:31 +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> On 04/08/20 20:13, michael.kubacki@outlook.com wrote:
>>> From: Sean Brogan <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>
>>>
>>> REF:https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2570
>>>
>>> Add new Azure Pipeline definitions to build and run ArmVirtPkg with:
>>>   * Ubuntu GCC5
>>> Add PyTool based build of ArmVirtPkg
>>> Add extdep for managing the iasl dependency
>>> Add ArmVirtPkg.ci.yaml for Core CI
>>> Add README-pytools for details and instructions
>>>
>>> Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
>>> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@arm.com>
>>> Cc: Leif Lindholm <leif@nuviainc.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sean Brogan <sean.brogan@microsoft.com>
>>
>> The commit message is missing your Signed-off-by. You can & should
>> keep Sean's of course, but since you are submitting it, I think yours
>> (too) is required, per "Developer Certificate of Origin" in
>> "Readme.md".
>
> Michael cannot attest for Sean's legal opinions about this
> contribution, only Sean can do that.

Not so sure about that (see below), but here I'm not questioning that.

> The attribution of authorship is already covered by the From: tag.

Agreed.

My point is that Michael is technically partaking in the contribution of
this patch, even if he's only forwarding (upstreaming) Sean's patch
verbatim. Therefore the language in "Readme.md" applies to him as a
contributor:

> # Code Contributions
> To make a contribution to a TianoCore project, follow these steps.
> [...]
> 2. Your commit message must include your `Signed-off-by` signature
> [...]
>
> # Developer Certificate of Origin
>
> Your change description should use the standard format for a
> commit message, and must include your `Signed-off-by` signature.
>
> [...]
>
> By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:
>
> (a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
>     have the right to submit it under the open source license
>     indicated in the file; or
>
> (b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
>     of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
>     license and I have the right under that license to submit that
>     work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
>     by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
>     permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
>     in the file; or
>
> (c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
>     person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
>     it.
>
> [...]

So, two points:
- under case (c), I do think Michael would attest for Sean's legal
  opinions,
- even if it's not case (c) that applies, a Signed-off-by is needed from
  Michael, for one of the other cases.

The DCO that's included in "Readme.md" spells out the following goal (or
"spirit"):

> In order to keep track of who did what, all patches contributed must
> include a statement that to the best of the contributor's knowledge
> they have the right to contribute it under the specified license.

If we don't include an S-o-b from Michael on the patch, his
participation in the upstreaming of this code change will disappear
entirely. The Committer field will refer to the mergify bot, the Author
field will refer (correctly) to Sean, and the [f]act of Michael posting
the patch to the list will be lost from the git history.

The one S-o-b that we could technically do without, IMO, is Sean's.

Laszlo